Fact scenario

Hespeler Cement Ltd. is an aggregate and cement batching company that owns several aggregate pits and plants in south-west Ontario. In 2019, Miller Cement Co. (Miller), a Canadian based multi-national corporation with its head office in Guelph, Ontario, purchased one of Hespeler's cement plants in Elmira, Ontario. The Elmira plant has been operating since 2000. Prior to 2000, the property was occupied by an auto parts manufacturer. At the time of the 2019 purchase, Miller had recently been awarded a contract to supply cement for a large road reconstruction program for which it needed additional cement manufacturing capacity. In order to secure the deal, Miller agreed to purchase the cement plant on an "as is" basis. Miller did conduct a cursory inspection of the plant, but the purpose of the inspection was to assess whether the plant could help fulfill Miller's production requirements, and was not focused on environmental matters.

The property purchase agreement included an acknowledgement that the real property owned by Hespeler Cement was used for "industrial operations" and that the purchaser (Miller) is responsible for "conducting environmental investigations as Miller sees fit". The purchase agreement also specifies that upon the closing date of the transaction, Miller "shall assume all responsibilities and liabilities arising out of or connected with the cement manufacturing operation and the condition of the real property". No other clauses in the agreement addressed environmental matters. Miller, as a sophisticated leader in the cement industry, understood that there were nuisances associated with cement manufacturing and air emissions from the operation would be subject to provincial oversight and control.

In 2020, a contractor who was engaged in excavation work on land abutting Hespeler Cement's property discovered soil that appeared to be contaminated with petroleum products. The contractor alerted the Ministry of Environment.Further investigation revealed that the source of the contamination was a large underground oil storage tank on Hespeler Cement's property that predated Hespeler's purchase of the property in 2000. There was no outward indication of the presence of an underground storage tank or of any contamination. The previous owner of Hespeler Cement did not disclose the presence of the underground storage tank, but a subsequent review of company records indicated that Hespeler was aware of the existence of the tank.

The neighbouring lands are severely contaminated and the owner of lands has indicated that they are likely to sue Miller for one million dollars.

Based on the fact scenario above, how can I answer this question please - "Are there circumstances where the rule caveat emptor does not apply to the transfer of contaminated lands?"

Thanks.